| Why Dan Brown Sucks: The Original Post |
[Apr. 12th, 2004|09:52 pm] |
Dan Brown is a man with horrible prose who has decided to craft a thriller out of nutso conspiracy theories and pseudo-science. He is a terrible author, and it really really confuses me as to why Da Vinci has been on the best seller list for so damn long.
I will start off by being positive - Brown is capable of some interesting plotting twists.
There. That's about it.
Here's some major complaints I've got about his work:
1) HUNDREDS of chapters per novel, with each "chapter" being something like 2 or 3 pages. These are not chapters - they are more like short parts that make-up a chapter, as evidenced in better form by how Stephen King will break up a chapter into numerous parts.
2) Ending each chapter with some idiotic phrase to keep you reading. Examples: "And then he saw the answer." "And then, his life was put into jeopardy." "And then, the knife descended." His books are basically like bad movies that CONSTANTLY cut off at the climax of a scene. It's one thing on page 3 when this is done. By page 300, I urge people to simply skip ahead and avoid this horrible writing tactic.
3) Absolutely one-dimensional lead characters. Robert Langdon, the star of all this, is absolutely forgettable. Mikey Mouse watch? Jeans? Willing to stay after class to discuss symbology and Adobe Photoshop (or something) with his students? Robert Langdon has no personality, and simply moves from one plot point to the next.
4) Random interesting facts inserted like a history lecture given by a professor who peppers his discussions with "didja know" items to keep his students awake. This will happen completely out of nowhere, you'll be reading and suddenly a (unquestioned) random fact will pop out of a character's mouth. "Did you know that Coke used to be green?" "Did you know that New York's underground is actually hundreds of feet deep and houses a vast population of people?" etc. etc. After a while, the onslought of "wow, that's neat!" factoids gets very, very tiresome.
5. Intelligent and attractive female leads. OH MY GOD. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, PLEASE GIVE US SOMETHING MORE!! JESUS CHRIST THIS IS BAD WRITING! Typical line: "His eyes fell [on] Susan Fletcher's legs. Hard to imagine they support a 170 IQ." I believe at the end of Angels and Demons, there's some idiotic, cringe-inducing line like - "You've never made it with a Yoga specialist, have you." or something similarly terrible.
6. Use of really, really poor science and history. The difference between Michael Crichton and Dan Brown is that Crichton does his homework first, and his bookwriting second. Brown, it appears, is the other way around. Crichton, for example, wrote "Prey," his (fairly bad) book on nanotechnology based on what could more or less possibly happen. The science is first and foremost the requirement, and is bent in an allowably literary manner. Same with, say, Jurassic Park. Brown, on the other hand, uses a lot of crap history and science I could get out of the books sitting on my shelf right now, such as "The Illuminati Papers," "Unexplained," and half a dozen other such titles that are fun to read but really carry no relevance. Also, whereas Crichton is always teeming with knowledge, Dan Brown's characters seem to have nothing more than what they say. There is no sense they have a vast wealth of knowledge to draw upon.
That gives us problems in character, structure, research, plot, and prose. WHAT IS LEFT THAT MAKES THIS WORTH READING?!
Again, he's got some plot twists, and some semblance of talent under all this crap that pours out. What I fear is that he'll start thinking that what he's written is actually good based on sales, which would only lead to more crap. Dan Brown went to my high school, Phillips Exeter Academy, and I consider it an embaressment whenever anyone mentions it. I pray he is not an exemplary member of the writing styles that come from an otherwise great institution.
And don't get me wrong - I'm not a pompous literary critic. Hell, I already mentioned Stephen King and Michael Crichton, right? I just simply want something worth reading.
In conclusion: Dan Brown sucks. |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif){kind=small}
danbrownsucks